Talk:The Wørd
Notes for tracking down/cleaning up The Wørd entries: template question: When the article that the "word" is most likely to direct to isn't in the same form as The Wørd, does it matter that the template reads differently than the "actual" The Wørd word? e.g. "Matthew McConaughey" when The Wørd = McConaughey? Does this level of pickiness matter? If so, is there a way to open the template so that the "Wørd word" can get typed, regardless of the name of the page? Are there times where it makes more sense to just direct to something existing than to create a new page for The Wørd? Is the goal an entry per The Wørd? How substantive? Does it make sense to blue each link, slap down the template, stub, and then hope someone comes along to build them? Or just delink until there's a reason to relink? There are references to the material from The Wørd segments scattered throughout various pages - I'm wondering if I can track some of those down and smuggle the templates in to already existing stuff. I know I've seen the Russian dolls somewhere - maybe Russia? Or maybe it's all going to be in the caps and spelling. arrrgggh... ::Good point citizen! As far as the McConaughey issue, there should be a page for the person, and a page for Stephen's word. All attempts to tag pages should follow the truthyisms of The Report. Everyone will work to twist the language to make it reflect Stephen's World.--WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer 07:59, 30 December 2006 (UTC) :::What about a page like cats for the Wørd "cat"? Do we need a new "cat" page to separate out the Wørd tagged "cat" from the general entry "cats"? And does that then generate a disambig page? Would it make more sense to have fewer pages and just make a "The Wørd" section in what seemed like appropriate articles (e.g., "cats," "gays" - which I am sooo about to rewrite, "McConaugay", whatever?). I'm not even sure I'm making sense here - I just wonder about whether it's a problem to start making each "Wørd" page its own page if it's also going to generate a bunch of re-directs and disambig pages. Especially given how thin and ragged most of the "Wørd" pages are. But it's 3:30 my time, so I probably should stop thinking about this for now and try to do that sleep thing I keep hearing about. If you could let me know what you want both structurally and process-wise (should I "blue" all the Wørds, even if I'm just basically tagging blank pages, or should I un-link the blank ones so this isn't a page full of red-links?), then I will get back to it sometime tomorrowish. Thanks again and again! --thisniss 08:31, 30 December 2006 (UTC) ::::Your instincts about waiting are right on. Once the holidays are over, hopefully El Payo will come back and work on some guidelines for others to learn to do what he/she does. Believe me, when El Payo does a page for one of Stephen's words, you will see why they can hold up on their own. I saw the cat problem, and am currently working on it. When you get the chance, go see "Alito" for one way to fix the McCauibnfvi4bifhey issue. This can be done, we just need to be precise in our language, that's all. Oh, and we need sleep, too.--WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer 08:39, 30 December 2006 (UTC) This morning (notes) I went ahead and tagged the currently unWørded blue links, except in the cases where it might cause confusion (as per above). So far, all the blue links have either been pre-tagged, or I have tagged, with the following exceptions: #did not tag Tape for "Double-Sided Tape" (although I think that this is actually supposed to be the entry for that Wørd) #did not tag Democrat, which redirects from the Wørd "Democrats" #did not tag Troops, which is where the Wørd "Military" currently redirects #did not tag John Bolton for "Secretary-General Bolton" other notes: #DID tag U.S.A for both "U.S.A.! U.S.A.!" and "U.S.A.? U.S.A.?" but did not build redirects or anything #stopped at Wikiality for now. :I will see what I can do to fix the ones you listed under "other"--WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer 16:59, 30 December 2006 (UTC) ::Oops, I mean "exceptions"--WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer 17:20, 30 December 2006 (UTC) afternoon notes #Words goes to a disambig page #Help goes to disambig - HELP! doesn't yet exist #All the other blue links have now been followed and "Word" tagged. Questions: #should we go back and de-word U.S.A. - make separate "Wørd"s for U.S.A.! U.S.A.! and U.S.A.? U.S.A.?? It seems like a choice between two equally truthy options, depending upon what one wants to do with it. I'm going to leave that to someone else's gut to decide. #Should I now delink the reds, or start making pages for them? In most cases, I may not have much to put beside the "Word" tag and "Stub." In some cases, I can fill in from memory and/or vid. But I don't mind making the pages for someone (El Payo?) to fill in later. Or just leaving the whole thing alone. Or doing more now. Whatever you wants, you gets. #Just so you know, a number of the "blued" links are still less-than-perfect shape. They are either still in note form, or just in need of cleaning up. So it could also be useful to decide what the desired "form" of the "The Wørd" pages is. Are they all supposed to look like dictionary entries, or can some longer, more like a summary of the Wørd segment (like the Cappuccino revision I did before I knew what I was supposed to be doing)? Once the form is clear, it would make sense to go back to the older entries (several of which are still just "Notes" at this point anyway) and do a general clean-up. Obviously, I would be willing to help with that, too. I apparently like writing fake dictionary entries. --thisniss 21:27, 30 December 2006 (UTC) Replies #I feel it is always best to make our entries reflect Stephen's leadership, for who are we to question, etc...so, yes, U.S.A. should be de-worded. #Do not de-link; pages that are needed, but not yet made, should be red--that is the purpose of it. #Most of the pages (except the ones we made HA! hilarity ensued...) are less than perfect. They can always be improved (by us of course, again ensuing hilarity...) The pages should take on their own personalities, every effort should be made to make them reflect Stephen's Word, however Users are encouraged to make each page as unique as each Word is that Stephen gives us. Articles which are just dictionary entries, on the other hand, should look like dictionary entries, except when they are not in the dictionary, like try for instance. :Thank you for your efforts here, since becoming Mrs. Colbert you have really let your virtual hair down...oh, and congratulations on that--WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer 21:44, 30 December 2006 (UTC)